• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

NUFC September 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fitzgerald said:
Yeah Newcastle and Sunderland take huge numbers most places but never seem to at Everton it’s weird. Most games there seem to be midweek to when we go there and it’s just not a nice place to go or away day. It won’t help that the mackems hate us as they have some weird link with Sunderland. Probably as you both are in the shadow of your bigger near neighbours
Click to expand...
WTF are you on about?
 
sproates33 said:
Have you got any examples of the PL treating takeovers differently i.e. different regulations, depending on which clubs involved?
Click to expand...
Well, the Man City takeover is similar enough to draw comparisons.

Mansour is the deputy prime minister of UAE,
Bin Salman is the Dep PM of KSA.

Abu Dhabi United Group is an investment group ran by Sheikh Mansour,
PIF is an investment group ran by Bin Salman.

PIF claim independence from KSA
ADUG claim independence from UAE

The Premier League wanted the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to be named as having influence as they believe ultimately KSA would be the owners. UAE aren't named as owners of Man City.
 
The Fish said:
Well, the Man City takeover is similar enough to draw comparisons.

Mansour is the deputy prime minister of UAE,
Bin Salman is the Dep PM of KSA.

Abu Dhabi United Group is an investment group ran by Sheikh Mansour,
PIF is an investment group ran by Bin Salman.

PIF claim independence from KSA
ADUG claim independence from UAE

The Premier League wanted the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to be named as having influence as they believe ultimately KSA would be the owners. UAE aren't named as owners of Man City.
Click to expand...
Logon or register to see this image
 
The Fish said:
Well, the Man City takeover is similar enough to draw comparisons.

Mansour is the deputy prime minister of UAE,
Bin Salman is the Dep PM of KSA.

Abu Dhabi United Group is an investment group ran by Sheikh Mansour,
PIF is an investment group ran by Bin Salman.

PIF claim independence from KSA
ADUG claim independence from UAE

The Premier League wanted the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to be named as having influence as they believe ultimately KSA would be the owners. UAE aren't named as owners of Man City.
Click to expand...
Logon or register to see this image
 
The Fish said:
Well, the Man City takeover is similar enough to draw comparisons.

Mansour is the deputy prime minister of UAE,
Bin Salman is the Dep PM of KSA.

Abu Dhabi United Group is an investment group ran by Sheikh Mansour,
PIF is an investment group ran by Bin Salman.

PIF claim independence from KSA
ADUG claim independence from UAE

The Premier League wanted the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to be named as having influence as they believe ultimately KSA would be the owners. UAE aren't named as owners of Man City.
Click to expand...
Manchester City supplied all relevant documentation that gained approval from the PL, when PIF were asked to do the same, they pulled out.

FYI from the interview with Richard Masters the following question was put forward :-

3. The scope of the Test

Supporters are baffled that a process that has a willing seller, a willing buyer and a willing fan base has lasted as long as it has without a conclusion one way or another? Many fans understandably assume that if they are not able to take control of the club, you should fail these prospective owners and directors to allow closure on the matter? That so long could be spent on the test without a clear decision being made one way or the other appears to Supporters to give credence to the idea that the prospective owners can’t fail the test or that the League is seeking to protect itself from an appeals process or legal action? Any clarity on this would be helpful.


(a) Can the League understand why supporters are mostly baffled by a process which has reportedly broken down because the League require a sovereign state of 45 million people to sit an owners and directors test? This may be a gross simplification of this process but clarity here would allow many fans to better understand what has happened and the Premier League’s perspective on matters.

This was answered as the following :-

  • Regarding Question 3 that the Trust put to the PL, the Premier League passionately defended it’s Owner and Director Test and confirmed that it had gone beyond the scope of the Test to try and offer the buyers a resolution process on the disagreement over who would control the football club.
  • The buyer in this instance declined to take up that option, instead withdrawing from the process. The Premier League could not make a decision on the Test ultimately because the PIF withdrew from the process. Arbitration would not have been on any other aspect of the Test but this key impasse between the PL and the PIF and the issue of which entity would own the club.
  • The Premier League confirmed that as the buyers had publicly withdrawn their bid to buy the club that it was not for the Premier League to speculate on the next steps for parties that were not the Premier League.
  • However the door remained open for any takeover bid, this one or otherwise, who wished to complete the test. In terms of communication about the future of the football club then the PL stressed that was for the club to communicate to it’s supporters
Manchester City were not involved in a piracy scandle which was needed to be clarified in order to differentiate between who 'ultimatley' would be running the club and breaches of the PL rules.
 
They are not still going on about it are they? f***ing hell

Its gonna be f***ing brilliant watching their reaction if our takeover goes through and it has the rumoured money behind it

Letters to MP's all awa
 
marco popas said:
It sounds like that is the situation. Newcastle aren't one of the top 6 big boys and are just another club making up the numbers
Click to expand...
See, this is true.
sproates33 said:
Manchester City supplied all relevant documentation that gained approval from the PL, when PIF were asked to do the same, they pulled out.

FYI from the interview with Richard Masters the following question was put forward :-

3. The scope of the Test

Supporters are baffled that a process that has a willing seller, a willing buyer and a willing fan base has lasted as long as it has without a conclusion one way or another? Many fans understandably assume that if they are not able to take control of the club, you should fail these prospective owners and directors to allow closure on the matter? That so long could be spent on the test without a clear decision being made one way or the other appears to Supporters to give credence to the idea that the prospective owners can’t fail the test or that the League is seeking to protect itself from an appeals process or legal action? Any clarity on this would be helpful.


(a) Can the League understand why supporters are mostly baffled by a process which has reportedly broken down because the League require a sovereign state of 45 million people to sit an owners and directors test? This may be a gross simplification of this process but clarity here would allow many fans to better understand what has happened and the Premier League’s perspective on matters.

This was answered as the following :-

  • Regarding Question 3 that the Trust put to the PL, the Premier League passionately defended it’s Owner and Director Test and confirmed that it had gone beyond the scope of the Test to try and offer the buyers a resolution process on the disagreement over who would control the football club.
  • The buyer in this instance declined to take up that option, instead withdrawing from the process. The Premier League could not make a decision on the Test ultimately because the PIF withdrew from the process. Arbitration would not have been on any other aspect of the Test but this key impasse between the PL and the PIF and the issue of which entity would own the club.
  • The Premier League confirmed that as the buyers had publicly withdrawn their bid to buy the club that it was not for the Premier League to speculate on the next steps for parties that were not the Premier League.
  • However the door remained open for any takeover bid, this one or otherwise, who wished to complete the test. In terms of communication about the future of the football club then the PL stressed that was for the club to communicate to it’s supporters
Manchester City were not involved in a piracy scandle which was needed to be clarified in order to differentiate between who 'ultimatley' would be running the club and breaches of the PL rules.
Click to expand...
This is the key point. The piracy issue is absolutely something that needed to be cleared up, however the only reason the PL wanted KSA named is to force KSA to have a vested interest in protecting the product from piracy. Totally understandable. However, the remit of the test is to identify the ultimate owners, right? They didn't seek confirmation that ADUG are separate from UAE from outside sources. Why's that?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top